Expand Congress to Accurately Reflect Population

[WhereThereIsFire]

A friend of mine just sent this comment via e-mail:

"In my opinion, the new Democratic Congress (when elected in 2006) should act to expand the House of Representatives by 100 members. The last time this happened was nearly a hundred years ago, when our population was perhaps a third the size. As things stand now, citizens of the most populous states have the least representation, small states exercise outsized power, especially as reflected in the Electoral College, and political gerrymandering is rampant."

I would agree that this is LONG overdue & could be done. What do you folks think about the idea? I know some will think it just creates more miscreants in office that we have to keep tabs on.

:dem:

[ck4829]

1. Totally agree

But, expect to get lots of DU'ers saying "No way!".

But, I think it's necessary.

[shoelace414]

2. I disagree because it would give more power to the party

and take power away from individual members (and they already have little power)

[papau]

3. being part of the urban 150 with no power is better than being part of

the urban 250 and actually having power to make law?

The check and balance for rural that is the Senate would continue as is, so why not have an urban voice in the house?

[shoelace414]

5. Actually I'm saying..

If you're one in 218 people you have a little power individually, perhaps you can caucus some people together (this does not work in the house currently).. but if you're one in 268 you have less power and it's less likely to get a caucus of people together to do something against the house leadership.

I know this rarely happens.. but it would happen less with more representatives

[WhereThereIsFire]

4. Abolish electoral college?

Of course, that would be an outstanding idea too!

[Davis_X_Machina]

6. WIse, and overdue.

Such a House would still be smaller than the UK's Commons.

I'd like to see a lower house of about 1500.

The additional cost is miniscule.